{"id":5887,"date":"2025-12-30T19:18:02","date_gmt":"2025-12-30T16:18:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/journal.phaselis.org\/?p=5887"},"modified":"2025-12-31T12:29:29","modified_gmt":"2025-12-31T09:29:29","slug":"pha-0189","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/journal.phaselis.org\/en\/uncategorized\/pha-0189","title":{"rendered":"Archaeological Imperialism and Legal Resistance: Paradigmatic Transformations in Nineteenth Century Greek, Egyptian, and Ottoman Cultural Heritage Law"},"content":{"rendered":"

Arkeolojik Emperyalizm ve Hukuki Direni\u015f: 19. Y\u00fczy\u0131l\u2019da Yunan, M\u0131s\u0131r ve Osmanl\u0131 K\u00fclt\u00fcrel Miras Hukukunda Paradigmatik D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcmler<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Mehmet Emin TEK\u0130N<\/strong>
\n\"\" https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-6762-5214<\/a><\/sub><\/p>\n

Murat ARSLAN<\/strong>
\n\"\" https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-1132-7423<\/a><\/sub><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

PHASELIS<\/em> XI (2025) 127-144
\n<\/strong>DOI<\/strong>: 10.5281\/zenodo.18105681
\nReceived Date<\/strong>: 05.11.2025 | Acceptance Date<\/strong>:\u00a023.12.2025
\nOnline Publication Date<\/strong>: 30.12.2025<\/p>\n

<\/div><\/div>\n
\n\t
\n\t\t\n

\"pdf\"<\/a> \u00a0Get PDF<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

\"references\"<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong> View PDF<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

\"info\"<\/a>\u00a0 References<\/a><\/b><\/p>\n\n\t\t

<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>
<\/div>\n

Abstract<\/strong>: This article examines the formation of cultural heritage protection law in the 19th century Eastern Mediterranean through a comparative analysis of the 1834 Greek, 1835 Egyptian, and 1884 Ottoman legal codifications. It explores how regional states responded to the systematic plundering that followed Napoleon\u2019s Egyptian Campaign of 1798 by developing their own legal defense mechanisms against Western archaeological imperialism. The study argues that the emergence of modern heritage law in the Eastern Mediterranean was not a passive adoption of European norms but rather the outcome of locally rooted resistance strategies and regional juridical innovation. The article demonstrates that the pioneering 1834 Greek law served as a model that was pragmatically condensed in Egypt and critically re-synthesized in the Ottoman Empire. Clause-level comparison reveals that article 85 of the Greek law was translated almost verbatim into article 5 of the Ottoman Antiquities Regulation, while religious and ethnic references were deliberately omitted and defensive administrative structures were added. The Ottoman introduction of a fee-based permit system, excavation-area restrictions, and the principle of compensating state officials from the excavator\u2019s budget exemplify an active process of legal adaptation rather than passive reception.The study further shows that all three legislations shared key paradigms\u2014state ownership of antiquities, prohibition of export, and the establishment of centralized museum systems\u2014yet each developed distinctive differentiation strategies shaped by its political priorities and institutional capacities. These findings suggest that the cultural heritage law of the Eastern Mediterranean should be re-evaluated as a regionally constructed mechanism of resistance to colonial extraction, marking a paradigmatic transformation in the global history of heritage governance.<\/p>\n

Keywords<\/strong>: Cultural Heritage Laws, Grece, Egypt, Ottoman Regulations, Archaeological Imperialism<\/p>\n

Top<\/a><\/div>\n

\u00d6z<\/strong>: Bu makale, 19. y\u00fczy\u0131l Do\u011fu Akdeniz\u2019de k\u00fclt\u00fcrel miras koruma hukukunun olu\u015fumunu, 1834 Yunan, 1835 M\u0131s\u0131r ve 1884 Osmanl\u0131 yasal d\u00fczenlemelerinin kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rmal\u0131 analiziyle incelemektedir. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fma, Napolyon\u2019un 1798 M\u0131s\u0131r Seferi sonras\u0131nda yo\u011funla\u015fan sistematik ya\u011fmaya kar\u015f\u0131 b\u00f6lge devletlerinin Bat\u0131l\u0131 arkeolojik emperyalizme y\u00f6nelik kendi hukuki savunma mekanizmalar\u0131n\u0131 nas\u0131l geli\u015ftirdi\u011fini ara\u015ft\u0131rmaktad\u0131r. Makalenin temel arg\u00fcman\u0131, modern k\u00fclt\u00fcrel miras hukukunun Do\u011fu Akdeniz\u2019de Avrupa normlar\u0131n\u0131n pasif bi\u00e7imde benimsenmesiyle de\u011fil, yerel direni\u015f stratejileri ve b\u00f6lgesel hukuki yenilik yoluyla ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fma, \u00f6nc\u00fc nitelikteki 1834 Yunan yasas\u0131n\u0131n M\u0131s\u0131r\u2019da pragmatik bir \u00f6zete, Osmanl\u0131 \u0130mparatorlu\u011fu\u2019nda ise ele\u015ftirel bir yeniden senteze d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc g\u00f6stermektedir. Madde d\u00fczeyindeki kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma, Yunan yasas\u0131n\u0131n 85. maddesinin Osmanl\u0131 \u00c2s\u00e2r-\u0131 At\u00eeka Nizamnamesi\u2019nin 5. maddesine neredeyse birebir \u00e7evrildi\u011fini, ancak dini ve etnik referanslar\u0131n bilin\u00e7li olarak \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131p savunma ama\u00e7l\u0131 idari yap\u0131lar\u0131n eklendi\u011fini ortaya koymaktad\u0131r. Osmanl\u0131\u2019n\u0131n har\u00e7 temelli izin sistemi, kaz\u0131 alan\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rlamalar\u0131 ve devlet g\u00f6revlilerinin \u00fccretinin kaz\u0131 yapan taraf\u0131ndan kar\u015f\u0131lanmas\u0131 ilkesi gibi d\u00fczenlemeleri, pasif al\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k yerine aktif bir hukuki uyarlama s\u00fcrecini g\u00f6stermektedir. Ayr\u0131ca \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma, \u00fc\u00e7 d\u00fczenlemenin de devlet m\u00fclkiyeti, ihracat yasa\u011f\u0131 ve merkezi m\u00fcze sistemi gibi temel paradigmalar\u0131 payla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak her birinin siyasi \u00f6ncelikleri ve kurumsal kapasitesi do\u011frultusunda farkl\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma stratejileri geli\u015ftirdi\u011fini ortaya koymaktad\u0131r. Bu bulgular, Do\u011fu Akdeniz k\u00fclt\u00fcrel miras hukukunun kolonyal kaynak aktar\u0131m\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 b\u00f6lgesel bir diren\u00e7 mekanizmas\u0131 olarak yeniden de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fini ve miras y\u00f6neti\u015fiminin k\u00fcresel tarihinde paradigmatik bir d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fc temsil etti\u011fini g\u00f6stermektedi.<\/p>\n

Anahtar Kelimeler:<\/strong>K\u00fclt\u00fcrel Miras Yasalar\u0131, Yunan, M\u0131s\u0131r, Osmanl\u0131 Kararnameleri, Arkeolojik Emperyalizm<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

<\/a>